Tuesday, 21 November 2017

Recently I had a lengthy comment on my blog
post about John Wesley in Wales [1].The comments raised so many issues that I felt it needed a long reply.
So I have made the reply a blog!

The commenter was anonymous and their chief
concern was that for all Wesley’s single mindedness and commitment, his
approach to life is not one that 21st century church leaders would
endorse.

Like many Christians today, I praise John Wesley's utter
single-mindedness in his commitment to the work that God called him to do. Most
of us know we fall far, far short, which is humbling. Embarrassing, in fact.

However, it occurs to me that Wesley's goals were aided by a
way life that few religious leaders today would promote.

I am sure anonymous is correct that few
religious leaders today would promote Wesley’s way of life, or even his style
of ministry. But that may say more about the poor standards of ministry in
Christianity now than it does about John Wesley!

I am also wary when the “present” stands in
judgement on the “past”. Understanding past beliefs and behaviours can only be
sensibly done if we also examine our own in the light of scripture and history.
We may misunderstand the past because we are so wrong ourselves. This is particularly
true with the whole subject of revival. Our experience of outpourings of the
Holy Spirit is so limited that we may view someone like Wesley as if he were
experiencing what we experience. He did not – he, and the other Methodists,
experienced the power of the Holy Spirit in a higher measure than us, thus we
may never fully understand why they did what they did. Disapproving the way of
life of a man like Wesley then becomes disapproval of revival altogether.

Then there are contemporary Christians who are
so caught up by the subject of revival that they glamorise the revivals of the
past, and elevate Wesley, Whitefield and the like to heroes second only to the
Apostles. They then fail to see the flaws in past revivals, so that any modern
claim to a revival is dismissed as it cannot achieve the standards of the pasts
ones. However the “standards” used are artificial. I am afraid contemporary
Christians do not make a good job of analysing the work of God in the past!

With the above provisos in mind I will attempt
to deal with some of the problems with Wesley’s way of life that anonymous
listed.

1. Celibacy is now unfashionable.

It is not clear that celibacy has ever been
fashionable except among Roman Catholic clergy and the Shakers! Most Christians
are not celibate otherwise populations would not grow. What I think anonymous
means is that for Wesley the need for sexual “fulfilment” was secondary
compared with preaching and building the church.

This is true, preaching and the ways of God did
override all other activities – that what happens when the Spirit is poured
out. It is the heart of what it means to be an enthusiast for Jesus. But the
danger is to compare Wesley, and the apostle Paul, and even Jesus, with our
culture that has become obsessed with all things sexual and its very public
discussion. This obsession is mirrored in the Western church where redefining
what is right and wrong in sexual behaviour is being radically revised. Anyone
following current church affairs would think that sexual behaviour and identity
are THE big issues of the moment, rather than the church’s lack of converts and
the impending extinction of most mainline denominations. It is possible the
modern church needs to look at Wesley and re-learn the priorities of the Christian
life

2. Parents/spouses who evangelise full-time are
often seen as neglectful of their families.

Wesley only married late in life, an unwise
marriage according to his many biographers. Hs itinerate lifestyle meant he was
unable to spend sufficient time with his wife. A similar view is held of George
Whitefield. But they were the exception among the Methodists, not the norm.
Most Methodist enthusiasts did not travel to the extent of these. Methodism
grew through enthusiasts – the “infected” Christians who converted others –
passing on the “infection” of enthusiasm in the process. It is this
enthusiastic aspect of Wesley’s life that the modern church needs. It does not
need itinerancy to the same extent that Wesley carried out. Enthusiasm and
strong family life are fully compatible.

3. Wesley's low level of expenditure would
alienate many modern families.

It is not clear what Wesley’s actual
expenditure was. A lot of money passed through his hands, but he was generous
and did not need much himself. Nevertheless a glance though his journals and
diaries pictures a man who was comfortable and far from “poor” in the sense of
wondering when his next meal was coming from. Again I think it was priorities.
When the need to preach Christ so that people are saved is a priority I doubt
if there is much need for a lavish lifestyle. The opulent lifestyle of modern
Christians may well be a substitute for a lack of passion for the person of
Jesus and compassion on the lost.

No he did not. But most evangelism was done by
the ordinary Methodists in the classes and churches that Wesley and others
built up. They could easily work up to 12 hours in a day and 6 days a week, but
it did not stop them witnessing and seeing converts. I find the same level of
evangelism in the parts of Uganda I visit, where the time spent in work is much
higher than the west. Contemporary Western Christians need to be careful that
we do not make excuses for our lack of zeal.

5. Churches are desperate for money; do they
want intelligent members who deliberately impoverish themselves?

Modern churches are elaborate institutions that
need money just to maintain themselves. Despite the Reformation, protestant
Christianity inherited the medieval model of church as a “state” in microcosm.
Thus much effort is needed to pay the professionals who minister on behalf of
the people. Early Methodism was largely lay-led, like the New Testament church,
thus not in need of the same degree of expenditure. Thus it did not matter to the
church if people were impoverished, as long as they were spiritually alive!

6. Wesley focused on the working classes, but
modern British evangelism aims at the middle class.

The more I read of Wesley’s life, and Whitefield’s,
the more I realise just how much they spread themselves over all classes.
Wesley spent much time ministering to the working class, that was a rarity in
his day, but he did also minister to the middle and upper classes. In Wales
Wesley could only minister to the wealthy as they were the only ones who could
understand English! But Wesley knew the better off were key to reaching the
poor, and to generating new ministers who would pastor churches in poor areas.

I understand the comment of anonymous that the
bulk of church planting is done where there are a large number of middle class
people, especially cities. Just think of HTB in London which can easily be
thought of as ministry to the “well off”. But the same church, and its network,
is generating many candidates for ministry who have a heart for the poor. Nevertheless,
modern church planters can learn from Wesley how to prioritise unreached
people, rather than all chasing after the same pool of “easier” people.

7. Some argue that evangelism today has to be
friendship-based rather than preaching-based.

I don’t think the two are opposites. The only
reason why Wesley had an audience was that people invited their friends to come
and hear him. The true enthusiasts were the people in his congregation that
brought others to listen.

The modern church has a real problem with
preaching and seems to be in a permanent state of apology about it. Preaching
is a command, not an option. The trouble is we have inherited a view of
preaching that is “church building” centred. Wesley certainly broke that
tradition, but it was still one man and his audience. Jesus and the Apostle
Paul preached, often to an audience, but sometimes it was dialogue, sometimes
it was one to one. Rarely was it in a church service! Perhaps we need to see
preaching in a wider context, and I think Wesley helps point us in that
direction

Anonymous finally said:

I'm not denying that the Holy
Spirit can answer these (and other) problems. But modern Christians are clearly
ambivalent about John Wesley; we admire his zeal, but as a role model he's
highly problematic for us. Of course, that may be our fault.

I would like to thank Anonymous for their comments. Such
comments help focus the mind and make us examine ourselves. Even if we do not
agree, provided they inspire us to serve Jesus with more zeal, then good will
result.

For me, having to take a forced break from research, it gave
me an excuse to write another blog!

Wednesday, 20 September 2017

Recently, while on holiday in Pembrokeshire, I passed a
plaque in the town of Haverfordwest dedicated to the memory of the pioneer
Methodist evangelist, John Wesley. My family and I have been on holiday in this area each year
for over 30 years so I must have passed it many times, but in 2017 I noticed it
for the first time [1]. Easy to miss; perhaps easier to miss than John Wesley
would have been in 1790!

Plaque to John Wesley in Haverfordwest

The plaque reads:

Near this spot on August 16th 1790
REV. JOHN WESLEY, M.A. then in his eighty-eighth year and on the last of his
fourteen visits to the town PREACHED to the people of Haverfordwest. His text
was,

"The Kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe
the gospel." Mark,
1:15

The early Methodists were called enthusiasts, a derogatory term in their day. I have used the word
to represent the sort of person whose Christian beliefs are infectious, so that
they pass it on to another person, some of whom also become enthusiasts.
Religion then spreads like a disease, typical of church growth in times of
revival.If the church in the UK
is to stop its current decline and grow again then it needs revival, and it
needs enthusiasts of the sort in Wesley’s day. It made me think what sort of
lessons we can learn from his day that would help the contemporary church.

1) The Time

Wesley preached through the 18th century. For
much of the century churches were in decline, with sparse attendance and
absentee clergy. Buildings were in disrepair.On one of his previous visits to Pembrokeshire, May 1781,
Wesley noted of St David’s Cathedral:

The cathedral has been a large and stately fabric, far
superior to any other in Wales. But a great part of it is fallen down already,
and the rest is hastening into ruin [2,3]

The effect of the Reformation and the Puritans was long
gone. The Christian religion was mocked by rich and poor alike, whose
preference was for entertainment and alcohol.In many ways the time was similar to 21st century
Britain – Christianity looked as if it was on the way out.

Wesley was not daunted by the situation – he, and the other
Methodists, saw it as a great opportunity to spread the gospel and glorify God.
Enthusiasts do not look at the situation, but to the God who has commissioned
them to make disciples despite the situation. 21st Century
secular Britain is a great opportunity for enthusiasts!

2) The Man

Wesley never stopped preaching, he never retired. This was
his 88th year and he still saw it as his mission to convert the lost
and build the Methodist societies. He travelled extensively. Before his final
tour of Pembrokeshire in August 1790 he had travelled from Lincolnshire, and afterwards
visited Bristol. [2,4].

He was persistent. This was his 14th visit. When
he started there was no Methodist cause in the town. By his final visit there
was a flourishing church and education among the children and poor [5]

He laboured despite poor health. On January 1st
he wrote

I am now an old man, decayed from head to foot. My eyes are
dim; my right hand shakes much; my mouth is hot and dry every morning; I have a
lingering fever almost every day; my motion is weak and slow. However, blessed be
God, I do not slack my labour: I can preach and write still. [2]

Enthusiasts have a zeal for the work of the gospel that need
not waver with age, health or the passage of time. The UK church has many
former enthusiasts from the evangelical and charismatic renewal of the late 20th
century who have given up the fight and fallen asleep spiritually. The lesson
of Wesley is that they can be enthusiasts again and spread revival until their
last breath.

3) The Culture

Wesley was preaching in Wales, at this time predominately
Welsh speaking. His normal practice of preaching to the poor and uneducated
could not be used as they could not speak English, the only language Wesley
could use [6]. Fortunately there was a separate Welsh speaking Methodist
connection that ministered to the poor in Wales.

Wesley, not put off by the culture, changed his strategy.
Instead of preaching directly to the poor he preached in places like
Haverfordwest where there were a number of wealthy families, who could speak both
English and Welsh. He then inspired them to teach the poor, especially the
children, and bring them to faith. One member of the Haverfordwest church was a
Miss Catherine Warren, a member of the local gentry who Wesley corresponded with
regularly to encourage her in her work [5]. Wesley expected conversions from
all levels of society, culture or class were no handicap. All were expected to
change, rich and poor alike. Then culture changed accordingly.

Enthusiasts are not put off by the culture of society.
Whether it’s atheists, humanists, Muslims, or “Diversity” and LGBT ideologies,
enthusiasts expect conversions that change behaviour and lead to cultural
changes that reflect God’s kingdom.

4) The Method – He Preached

Wesley’s text that day was “repent and believe the gospel”, one he had no doubt preached many
times. His message was simple and direct, sin is the problem, Jesus is the
answer. His was no message of acceptance and inclusion, popular in much of
today’s church, but of one of justification and transformation. No one had to stay
the way they were – through repentance and faith they could be put right with
God immediately, and become what He designed them to be. Enthusiasts preach
directly to the heart of the problem.

Wesley preached. He was not a social activist, though
he did much social good. He did not organise discussions or debates, perhaps
where a group of people could decide what is true. Though no doubt his
preaching left many people discussing and debating! He preached, that is he
took a text explained, it and persuading people to obey is implications. He did
not do it to be popular. Preaching was no more popular in his day than in ours;
Wesley was sometimes stoned and often verbally abused. He preached because Jesus
commanded it. Enthusiasts obey the command and preach.

Wesley preached everywhere. He did not wait for
people to come, but went to them. Enthusiasts are not locked away in church
buildings, but out and about, speaking to people whether ones and twos, or in
crowds.

Wesley preached the Bible; he had confidence in its
message and in the truth of its words. Recently I was at a church where the
minister read out some words of Jesus from Matthew’s gospel ,“And if he refuses to listen
even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector”. The minister then said, “This couldn’t have been the words of
Jesus. Something must have got lost in translation between him and Matthew!”
Sadly that lack of confidence in scripture has been common in the church for a
few generations and has undoubtedly assisted its decline [7]. Enthusiasts have
confidence in the truth of scripture, so much that they live by it, and must
bring it to the attention of all they meet.

If Wesley was around today, it is not clear what he would
have made of a plaque in his name. But he would have recognised society, the
plight of sinners, and the state of the church. No doubt he would still be an
enthusiast and behaved exactly as that day in Haverfordwest. Today’s
enthusiasts need only to follow his example.

The plaque's location in Dew Street, Haverfordwest

References & Notes

[1] The plaque was unveiled on the 18th May 1956
at the town’s grammar school. It was later moved to the town’s library, date
not known.

[3] As a result of the 18th revivals started by
the Methodist, all the UK Christian denominations experienced revival in the
first half of the 19th century. Thus, in the 50 years following
Wesley’s 1781 visit to St David’s, the Cathedral was rebuilt by a now
flourishing congregation, as were most of the decaying parish churches in
Britain.

Of course there was revival and church growth among the
Methodists from the 1730s onwards. But it took to the end of the century before
it spilled over into the other denominations in a big enough way to repair the
damage of their long period of decline and neglect.

[4] John Wesley kept a private diary separate from his
published journals. Although his journal makes no mention of the 1790 Wales
tour, his diary gives the following details for Haverfordwest:

In 1785 John
Wesley wrote to a Miss Catherine Warren, a lady from a renowned local family,
who had the care of 50 children to encourage her to continue her good work.
Spiritual progress was also expected in this work. Wesley wrote in his journal
of these children: “Several of them are
much awakened, and the behaviour of all is so composed that they are a pattern
to the whole congregation.”

There was no Wesleyan Methodist church in Haverfordwest in
1769. But by 1782 it was established and thriving, mainly due to the enthusiasm
of Miss Warren.

Bulletin of the Wesley Historical Society in Wales, Number
1, P76, 2011.

[7] See the series of articles on church growth and decline
on the Presbyterian Church of Wales as illustrative of the post 19th
century decline of the church. This decline is attributed to a fall in
conversions, caused by a lack of revival, rooted in a mixture of institutionalism,
rationalism and liberalism, which undermined the church’s confidence in
Scripture and the God who reveals himself through it.

Tuesday, 27 June 2017

Limits to Church Growth 4

In three previous blogs I have looked at congregational
growth being limited by:

I.Demand
from society [1];

II.Supply
by the church [1];

III.Lack
of enthusiasts [2];

IV.Inadequate
resource production [3].

When congregational growth stalls and appears to hit a limit,
the obvious question is to ask “why?”. In particular, has growth ended because
of factors within the church, or factors in society? If there are no internal
limits to growth then society will always eventually hinder growth, limit (I)
above. However churches often cause their own growth barriers, not evangelising
enough, (II); have enthusiasts, the evangelisers, who cease to be effective,
(III); or not generating enough resources in the church to attract, disciple
and retain people, (IV).

Church congregations are a mixture of people, some are
enthusiasts, wanting to reach people and see them converted. However some are
inactive in conversion, preferring to spend their time on other aspects of
church life, worship, socials, good works and the like. The balance of people
in the church determines its culture. Thus I will put forward the hypothesis:

The balance of enthusiasts and inactive believers in
the church determines the evangelistic effectiveness of the church.

I will call this effectiveness the church’s evangelistic purity, and propose the conjecture:

Falling evangelistic purity will limit the
congregation’s growth, regardless of the size of society.

The Model

The model to represent
this situation is given in figure 1. People are converted to church from
outside. The cloud in the left hand of the diagram represents and unlimited
supply of potential converts [4]. The reinforcing loop R1 captures the action of the enthusiasts, the more enthusiasts the
more converted, thus even more enthusiasts. I have assumed all new converts
become enthusiasts first. Enthusiasts do not stay active in evangelism
indefinitely, thus they become inactive after a fixed duration, balancing loop B1.

Figure 1: Evangelistic purity model of church growth

Following the hypothesis, the conversion rate for each
enthusiast depends on the evangelistic purity of the church. If the number of
enthusiasts increases then the evangelistic purity of the church also
increases. This reinforces the growth of enthusiasts, R2. However the more inactive believers the lower the evangelistic
purity; a balancing loop resisting the growth of enthusiasts B2. If B2 is large enough then church growth will stop.

Simulation

A simulation of the model, for a given conversion rate,
duration enthusiast, and ratio of enthusiasts to inactive in the church, is
given in figure 2 [5]. Church numbers are the sum of the enthusiasts and the
inactive believers.

Figure 2: Falling evangelistic purity results in a limit to church growth

A church of 30 people grows rapidly over 40 years, but is
limited to just over 200 people as its evangelistic purity has fallen, figure 2.
This limit is reached even though the pool of potential converts is infinite.
It is a purely church induced limit, not affected by society. Looking at the two types of believers,
it can be seen that although the number of enthusiasts rises, their growth
eventually slows as they become increasingly ineffective in a church becoming
dominated by believers with no interest in evangelism, figure 3. Enthusiast
numbers peak and afterwards fall away.

Analysing the cause of the changes in enthusiast numbers
shows that it is the impact of the loop B2
that causes their numbers to fall and eventually halts church growth. Impact is
a measure of the extent to which a feedback loop influences the curvature of
the graph [6]. Figure 4 shows the regions of loop dominance on the enthusiasts.

Figure 4: Periods of loop dominance on enthusiast numbers

Enthusiast growth initially accelerates due to R1, their rising numbers, and R2, the influence of the enthusiasts on
evangelistic purity, figure 4, first phase. The growth slows due to the
generation of inactive believers, B1,
and their negative effect on evangelistic purity, B2, second phase. Loop B2
becomes so powerful it causes the number of enthusiasts to change from growth
to decline as conversions fall below the loss of enthusiasts. This is the third
phase.

Thus the conjecture is
demonstrated, falling church purity limits church growth, because the negative
effect of inactive believers limits the generation of enthusiasts.

Tipping Point

So what can be done to remove this barrier to growth? There
are three possible strategies:

1.Increase the effectiveness of the enthusiasts;

2.Increase the duration new converts remain
enthusiastic;

3.Have a church that has a greater balance of
enthusiasts to inactive.

Applying any of these three strategies raises the limit to
the congregation’s growth, due to a larger generation of enthusiasts. Figures 5
and 6 show the effect of increasing the initial purity of the church, the ratio
of enthusiasts to inactive. Purity 1
is the lowest; Purity 5 the highest.
Thus the more evangelistically pure churches are able to reach a higher limit
to growth than the impure ones.

Figure 5: Effect of increasing initial church purity on church growth

Figure 5: Effect of increasing initial church purity on growth of enthusiasts

There comes a point if the purity is increased further, church
growth continues indefinitely, curve Purity
5,figure 5, because enthusiasts
continue to be generated, figure 6. Thus a sufficiently pure congregation can
remove this barrier to church growth, and concentrate on the other barriers
that come into play, not included in this model. It is good to know some growth
barriers can be removed.

One way to raise church purity is to allow the inactive to
leave. It sounds counter-intuitive, but if church leaving increases, church
growth increases, as long as it is the evangelistically inactive that leave.
This is an example of Kelley’s hypothesis that a stricter church is stronger
and thus more likely to grow [7].

The principle of evangelistic purity encouraging growth can
apply across all churchmanships, not just conservative or evangelical ones, as purity
refers to participation in the mission and recruitment to the church, rather
than theology as such. It may be possible to show that certain theologies are
more likely to encourage evangelistic purity, particularly ones that see the
need for personal salvation. But that takes us beyond this simple model, which
shows that having enough people in the church committed to evangelism can
remove a barrier to church growth.

References & Notes

[1] Limits to Church Growth – Part 1. Lack of
Supply & Lack of Demand.

[5] It is normal to use computer simulation to produce
results of system dynamics model, though not always essential. The results of
the evangelistic purity model can all be proved mathematically. In this blog
the graphs were produced By the Stella Architect software, ISEE systems, https://www.iseesystems.com/

[6] The concept of loop impact is related to the concept of
force in Newtonian mechanics. See: